To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

mmmm? trojan
Tuesday, June 29, 1982 University of Southern California Volume XCI, Number 10
USC ranks 4th nationally in gifts
A survey of voluntary support for higher education ranks the university fourth among colleges and universities reporting the highest gift totals in 1980-81.
The survey, conducted annually by the Council for Financial Aid to Education, is cosponsored by the Council for Advancement and Support of Education and the National Association of Independent Schools. The 1981-82 survey results are based on data gathered from 928 private and public colleges and universities.
Gifts to the university in the 1980-81 academic year totaled S55.234.810 — a record sum for the university. Only at Harvard, Stanford and Yale did voluntary donations surpass the USC total.
Others in the top 10 (in order of ranking) were: Cornell University, the University of Minnesota, the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Johns Hopkins University.
Gift totals in the top 10 ranged from approximately $47 million to S91 million.
Overall, voluntary support for higher education in 1980-81 rose to $4.2 billion, for an 11.3 percent increase over the prior academic year.
The university’s increase. 30.8 percent, was nearly three times the national rate.
According to the survey findings, alumni, other individuals, foundations, and business all gave record amounts to colleges and universities.
“An essential factor in attracting funds from these sources is the academic quality of the institution,” says James Appelton, vice president for development.
"USC’s success in resource development reflects the growing recognition of the university’s academic reputation.
“Foundations are in the business of giving away dollars to the most qualified places. Corporations increasingly are targeting their gifts to institutions from which they recruit the best employees.
“Alumni, parents and friends are motivated to contribute to an institution that merits their support."
Nationally, alumni and “other individuals” contributed by far the largest share of gifts to higher education in 1980-81. Both groups exceeded the billion-dollar mark for the first time.
The survey shows that non-alumni increased their giving by 18.9 percent. At USC, contributions from non-alumni rose 75.4 percent and represented more than 40 percent of the total dollar amount.
Nationally, alumni support increased 15.3 percent. University alumni contributions soared 91.3 percent.
“USC Trojans are a fiercely loyal group.” Appleton says. “The intensity of their historical and continuing indentification with the university is truly exceptional.”
The survey’s national figures show that foundations upped their support to higher education by 2.1 percent, to $922 million. Corporate giving rose 11.8 percent to $778 million.
At USC, foundation support jumped 35.3 percent, to a total apgyoaching $16 million, and businesses gave $7.2 million, for a 17.3 percent increase over the prior academic year.
The university’s 1980-81 achievement, Appleton says, reflects the larger success of its six-year fund-raising campaign. Toward Century II. which ended in June 1981. That campaign, the second most successful fund-raising campaign in the history of higher education, generated contributions of $309 million, well surpassing the original goal of $265 million.
Other important factors in the university’s performance, he adds, were the university's development staff and the trustees' and administrators’ commitment to resource development.
“This commitment is motivated by a strong desire to keep tuition as low as possible,” Appelton says. “Ideally, our goal is to increase external resources to the point where tuition increases will not be necessary.”
The challenge that inflation poses to higher education is underscored in the national survey of voluntary support. While contributions rase 11.3 percent in 1980-81, they failed to match the Consumer Price Index inflation rate of 11.6 percent.
“All of higher education faces difficult times in the 80’s,” Appleton says. “USC's past success in resource development bodes well for the future. But we will have to be more creative than ever — calling on alumni and friends for increasing support.”
PROFESSORS DISCUSS CAUSES
Timing a factor in ERA defeat
What went wrong with the Equal Rights Amendment? What lessons does its defeat hold for the women’s movement?
These are questions now being raised with the ERA’s failure to win ratification by the June 30 deadline.
The answers lie partly in a changing social climate and partly in misdirected political strategies, according to university experts in women’s studies.
Timing was a major factor in the ERA’s downfall, says Tom Jablonsky, a history instructor and the associate director of the Program for the Study of Women and Men in Society.
“The ERA movement came on the tail end of a period of social activism and ran headlong into a major shift toward conservatism,” Jablomsky says.
“In 1972, when the amendment went to the states for ratification, American society was still in the heat of the 1960s unrest over racism and the Vietnam war.
“Most of the state ratifications came between 1972 and 1974. The numbers dwindled as we entered the era of the oil embargo and the consequent economic recession.”
Historically, women have not made political gains in a conservative climate, says Lynn O’-Leary-Archer, an instructor in the program and specialist in American social history and women’s history.
“Reform in America is closely linked to egalitarian ideas and to the desire to regain ‘the promised land,’ ” O'Leary-Archer says. “This spirit ebbs and flows. A period of reform is characteristically followed by a period of backlash.”
Women’s suffrage grew out of the progressive reform movement from 1890 to 1920, O’Leary-Archer points out.
Additionally, advocates of suffrage were able to capture widespread support because their stance was relatively conservative, compared to the position espoused by more radical feminists of that day.
“The National American Woman’s Suffrage Association used conservative arguments like ‘Women will keep us out of war,’ or 'Mothers who have the vote will keep informed, so they’ll be better at training their sons as future leaders of society,’ ” O’Leary-Archer says.
“The suffrage movement also played on the racism of those times, arguing that large numbers of (white) women voters would help blacks and immigrants at bay.”
Though some of their arguments seem odious today, these political strategies worked. They worked, in part, because they led men in power to think they had something to gain by supporting the women’s cause.
“That’s an important tactic to remember,” says Mark Kann, an associate professor of political science who studies feminist and anti-feminist theory.
While mounting a concentrated attack on the pervasiveness of male supremacy, the women's movement of the 1970s neglected to analyze the vulnerabilities of that supremacy and to use those vulnerabilities as leverage to wrin reform.” “To be a real political beast, you have to know the oppostion and how it needs you. Although most polls show' a majority of Americans favoring equal rights for women, the male legislators who voted down the ERA clearly were not convinced that ratification would be in their owti best interest.”
In the early 1970s, the feminist movement was perceived as having an anti-male bias, and that perception hurt the ERA later on, Jablonsky believes.
“The finger-pointing and the use of rhetoric like ‘male chauvinism' may have roused the spirit of women supporters, but it backfired politically,” he says.
“The rhetoric tapered off, but it left a lingering shadow that damaged the movement, especially in conservative states.
“Most women have some kind of relationship with men, and they feel uncomfortable pointing a finger at them. The opposition layed on these feelings quite effectively.”
Another mistake, Jablonsky believes, was the movement’s focus on specific issues, such as equality in the workplace, inequitable applications of criminal law, and restrictions growing out of protective labor legislation.
“That opened the door to a case-by-case discussion, encouraging the opposition to raise farfetched issues like unisex bathroom,” he says.
“ERA supporters let the amendment get nickeled and dimed to death. They should have
(Continued on page 5)
Groups offer a number of free events for bored students
Free events are being offered to students this summer. Some are sponsored by the Student Programs office. Some of the events include a Comedy Day, Trojan Night at Dodger Stadium, and free movies.
Comedy day will be this Thursday and the featured performer will be Carl Carlsson, an internationally famous juggler. He will perform highlights from his Las Vegas show at Tommy Trojan starting at 11:30 a.m. Carlsson, who has appppeared on the Mike Douglas Show, combines magic, comedy, juggling, and audience participation in his act.
Appearing on the same day and at the same time in Com-
* mons cafeteria will be three comedians.
Breaking Away, the Academy Award-nominated film, will be shown in Bovard at noon on July 8. Special bicycle events will be held that week. Announcements will be made.
Trojan Night at Dodger Stadium is the only event with a cost. For five dollars, students can enjoy watching the Dodgers take on the Montreal Expos on July 8. A bus will be available for roundtrip transportation from the campus. The game starts at 7:30 p.m. Students can sign up for both tickets and the bus at the Student Program Office, STU 202.
Other free events are the movies being offered by DKA. The films are usually shown in Norris Theatre. This week’s offerings include Richard Pryor: Live on Sunset Strip; The Gauntlet, starring Clint Eastwood, and The French Connection II, starring Gene Hackman. For more information on upcoming films, call 747-0783.
Free tickets for performances at the Hollywood Bowl are being offered to international students and their friends. Music by Stravinsky, Beethoven and Handel are just some of the features of this concet se-
ries. Leonard Bernstein also will be appearing as a guest conductor. Picnic dinners are a favorite tradition at Hollywood Bowl performances. Tickets are available for a number of concerts in July and August and for two concerts in September. For more information call 743-2666, or stop by STU 300. The events are being sponsored by the Office of International Students and Scholars and the Los Angeles Philharmonic Association.
Interest clubs, sponsored by the Intramural-Recreation department, are still active this summer. Clubs in badminton, equistrian, full contact karate, indoor soccer, kung fu, photography, sailing, team handball, tennis weightlifting, windsurfing, and workout are holding regular meetings. Recreation facilities are open for student, faculty and staff use. For information on times when facilities are open and on interest clubs, call 743-5127.

mmmm? trojan
Tuesday, June 29, 1982 University of Southern California Volume XCI, Number 10
USC ranks 4th nationally in gifts
A survey of voluntary support for higher education ranks the university fourth among colleges and universities reporting the highest gift totals in 1980-81.
The survey, conducted annually by the Council for Financial Aid to Education, is cosponsored by the Council for Advancement and Support of Education and the National Association of Independent Schools. The 1981-82 survey results are based on data gathered from 928 private and public colleges and universities.
Gifts to the university in the 1980-81 academic year totaled S55.234.810 — a record sum for the university. Only at Harvard, Stanford and Yale did voluntary donations surpass the USC total.
Others in the top 10 (in order of ranking) were: Cornell University, the University of Minnesota, the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Johns Hopkins University.
Gift totals in the top 10 ranged from approximately $47 million to S91 million.
Overall, voluntary support for higher education in 1980-81 rose to $4.2 billion, for an 11.3 percent increase over the prior academic year.
The university’s increase. 30.8 percent, was nearly three times the national rate.
According to the survey findings, alumni, other individuals, foundations, and business all gave record amounts to colleges and universities.
“An essential factor in attracting funds from these sources is the academic quality of the institution,” says James Appelton, vice president for development.
"USC’s success in resource development reflects the growing recognition of the university’s academic reputation.
“Foundations are in the business of giving away dollars to the most qualified places. Corporations increasingly are targeting their gifts to institutions from which they recruit the best employees.
“Alumni, parents and friends are motivated to contribute to an institution that merits their support."
Nationally, alumni and “other individuals” contributed by far the largest share of gifts to higher education in 1980-81. Both groups exceeded the billion-dollar mark for the first time.
The survey shows that non-alumni increased their giving by 18.9 percent. At USC, contributions from non-alumni rose 75.4 percent and represented more than 40 percent of the total dollar amount.
Nationally, alumni support increased 15.3 percent. University alumni contributions soared 91.3 percent.
“USC Trojans are a fiercely loyal group.” Appleton says. “The intensity of their historical and continuing indentification with the university is truly exceptional.”
The survey’s national figures show that foundations upped their support to higher education by 2.1 percent, to $922 million. Corporate giving rose 11.8 percent to $778 million.
At USC, foundation support jumped 35.3 percent, to a total apgyoaching $16 million, and businesses gave $7.2 million, for a 17.3 percent increase over the prior academic year.
The university’s 1980-81 achievement, Appleton says, reflects the larger success of its six-year fund-raising campaign. Toward Century II. which ended in June 1981. That campaign, the second most successful fund-raising campaign in the history of higher education, generated contributions of $309 million, well surpassing the original goal of $265 million.
Other important factors in the university’s performance, he adds, were the university's development staff and the trustees' and administrators’ commitment to resource development.
“This commitment is motivated by a strong desire to keep tuition as low as possible,” Appelton says. “Ideally, our goal is to increase external resources to the point where tuition increases will not be necessary.”
The challenge that inflation poses to higher education is underscored in the national survey of voluntary support. While contributions rase 11.3 percent in 1980-81, they failed to match the Consumer Price Index inflation rate of 11.6 percent.
“All of higher education faces difficult times in the 80’s,” Appleton says. “USC's past success in resource development bodes well for the future. But we will have to be more creative than ever — calling on alumni and friends for increasing support.”
PROFESSORS DISCUSS CAUSES
Timing a factor in ERA defeat
What went wrong with the Equal Rights Amendment? What lessons does its defeat hold for the women’s movement?
These are questions now being raised with the ERA’s failure to win ratification by the June 30 deadline.
The answers lie partly in a changing social climate and partly in misdirected political strategies, according to university experts in women’s studies.
Timing was a major factor in the ERA’s downfall, says Tom Jablonsky, a history instructor and the associate director of the Program for the Study of Women and Men in Society.
“The ERA movement came on the tail end of a period of social activism and ran headlong into a major shift toward conservatism,” Jablomsky says.
“In 1972, when the amendment went to the states for ratification, American society was still in the heat of the 1960s unrest over racism and the Vietnam war.
“Most of the state ratifications came between 1972 and 1974. The numbers dwindled as we entered the era of the oil embargo and the consequent economic recession.”
Historically, women have not made political gains in a conservative climate, says Lynn O’-Leary-Archer, an instructor in the program and specialist in American social history and women’s history.
“Reform in America is closely linked to egalitarian ideas and to the desire to regain ‘the promised land,’ ” O'Leary-Archer says. “This spirit ebbs and flows. A period of reform is characteristically followed by a period of backlash.”
Women’s suffrage grew out of the progressive reform movement from 1890 to 1920, O’Leary-Archer points out.
Additionally, advocates of suffrage were able to capture widespread support because their stance was relatively conservative, compared to the position espoused by more radical feminists of that day.
“The National American Woman’s Suffrage Association used conservative arguments like ‘Women will keep us out of war,’ or 'Mothers who have the vote will keep informed, so they’ll be better at training their sons as future leaders of society,’ ” O’Leary-Archer says.
“The suffrage movement also played on the racism of those times, arguing that large numbers of (white) women voters would help blacks and immigrants at bay.”
Though some of their arguments seem odious today, these political strategies worked. They worked, in part, because they led men in power to think they had something to gain by supporting the women’s cause.
“That’s an important tactic to remember,” says Mark Kann, an associate professor of political science who studies feminist and anti-feminist theory.
While mounting a concentrated attack on the pervasiveness of male supremacy, the women's movement of the 1970s neglected to analyze the vulnerabilities of that supremacy and to use those vulnerabilities as leverage to wrin reform.” “To be a real political beast, you have to know the oppostion and how it needs you. Although most polls show' a majority of Americans favoring equal rights for women, the male legislators who voted down the ERA clearly were not convinced that ratification would be in their owti best interest.”
In the early 1970s, the feminist movement was perceived as having an anti-male bias, and that perception hurt the ERA later on, Jablonsky believes.
“The finger-pointing and the use of rhetoric like ‘male chauvinism' may have roused the spirit of women supporters, but it backfired politically,” he says.
“The rhetoric tapered off, but it left a lingering shadow that damaged the movement, especially in conservative states.
“Most women have some kind of relationship with men, and they feel uncomfortable pointing a finger at them. The opposition layed on these feelings quite effectively.”
Another mistake, Jablonsky believes, was the movement’s focus on specific issues, such as equality in the workplace, inequitable applications of criminal law, and restrictions growing out of protective labor legislation.
“That opened the door to a case-by-case discussion, encouraging the opposition to raise farfetched issues like unisex bathroom,” he says.
“ERA supporters let the amendment get nickeled and dimed to death. They should have
(Continued on page 5)
Groups offer a number of free events for bored students
Free events are being offered to students this summer. Some are sponsored by the Student Programs office. Some of the events include a Comedy Day, Trojan Night at Dodger Stadium, and free movies.
Comedy day will be this Thursday and the featured performer will be Carl Carlsson, an internationally famous juggler. He will perform highlights from his Las Vegas show at Tommy Trojan starting at 11:30 a.m. Carlsson, who has appppeared on the Mike Douglas Show, combines magic, comedy, juggling, and audience participation in his act.
Appearing on the same day and at the same time in Com-
* mons cafeteria will be three comedians.
Breaking Away, the Academy Award-nominated film, will be shown in Bovard at noon on July 8. Special bicycle events will be held that week. Announcements will be made.
Trojan Night at Dodger Stadium is the only event with a cost. For five dollars, students can enjoy watching the Dodgers take on the Montreal Expos on July 8. A bus will be available for roundtrip transportation from the campus. The game starts at 7:30 p.m. Students can sign up for both tickets and the bus at the Student Program Office, STU 202.
Other free events are the movies being offered by DKA. The films are usually shown in Norris Theatre. This week’s offerings include Richard Pryor: Live on Sunset Strip; The Gauntlet, starring Clint Eastwood, and The French Connection II, starring Gene Hackman. For more information on upcoming films, call 747-0783.
Free tickets for performances at the Hollywood Bowl are being offered to international students and their friends. Music by Stravinsky, Beethoven and Handel are just some of the features of this concet se-
ries. Leonard Bernstein also will be appearing as a guest conductor. Picnic dinners are a favorite tradition at Hollywood Bowl performances. Tickets are available for a number of concerts in July and August and for two concerts in September. For more information call 743-2666, or stop by STU 300. The events are being sponsored by the Office of International Students and Scholars and the Los Angeles Philharmonic Association.
Interest clubs, sponsored by the Intramural-Recreation department, are still active this summer. Clubs in badminton, equistrian, full contact karate, indoor soccer, kung fu, photography, sailing, team handball, tennis weightlifting, windsurfing, and workout are holding regular meetings. Recreation facilities are open for student, faculty and staff use. For information on times when facilities are open and on interest clubs, call 743-5127.